Juan Alberto Ovalle works for Focus on the Family and has narrated the Bible in Spanish for them. While working to save the family from filthy pornographers and pedophiles, however, he forgot to mention he’s one of them.
He used the Internet to lure a 15yr old girl for sex. The girl ended up being a police officer. Whoops.
After first encountering the officer who was posing as a 15-year-old girl in a chat room last week, Orvalle made “sexually graphic statements in a chat room to a person he believed to be an underage teen,” the district attorney’s office said. When the undercover officer said her mom wouldn’t be home the next day, Orvalle said he was “horny” and made arrangements to come to her house, according to an arrest affidavit cited by The Post.
What a creepy hypocrite.
Ick.
As a police officer myself, who spent 5 years working directly with incarcerated and paroled sex offenders, I would LOVE to get a gig posing as a teen online to catch a bunch of them.
Initial reaction: Ugh. What a twisted, maladjusted freak.
Secondary reaction: ROFLMAO
Irony is so sweet sometimes. Just glad it was a cop on the other end…
I love it when the light of day falls upon and exposes dark holes where the sun never shone.
It’s this sort of hypocritical BS that really gets to me. It happens more often than these folks will admit. Just glad this creep was busted.
This post makes a lot more sense to me than the post about Rick Warren, because it’s indisputable that this guy’s a hypocrite.
This same thing happened to a science teacher at my high school. he used to teach forensic science and would always say how child molesters were the lowest of the low, and then he tried to meet a 14 year old at a denny’s… the 14 year old turned out to be two undercover cops. he’s now in jail.
There maybe around 1.5 billion Christians in the world. So there could be millions of people working as low level functionaries in Christian organizations. I am sure if someone kept track, one could find dozens of stories like this everyday.
I am not defending “Focus on the Family”. These problems can happen to any organization, or the city of Portland, Oregon.
Lets go after the big fish.
Well…arguably one of the “biggest fish” lives in the Vatican City. As bad as the molestors are, those who hide them and reassign them to molest again are for political or financial reasons are…if not worse, then particularly vile.
It is unfair to even imply that molestors in the church somehow damn the entire church (not that you are necessarily doing that here). At the same time, the healthyness of Christian attitudes and teachings on sex is a legitimate topic for discussion.
I’ve spent a lot of time in Colorado, and Colorado Springs (location of Focus on Family) is a religious freak show. I much prefer Boulder where open minded people get into all sorts of fun stuff.
Of course, Focus on the Family was home to Teddy Haggard–that poor dude still doesn’t realize he’s gay–he just thinks he’s a sinner that needs to be fix.
What a messed up way to live.
Thanks, you gave me a post for today!
Ye Gods! Is it a prerequisite for the job to be a paedophile? How do these people justify themselves? I’m against the Death Penalty, but is there some way they could be welded in their cells and never let out?
Yes, I’m angry.
Does anyone actually know when this guy came to Christ? I mean, what did he actually do for FotF, other than get paid to read in Spanish. Calling him a hypocrite is a stretch, IMO, if you have no proof that he even believed all that stuff he read.
Of course, the title of creep still fits. Just may not be a hypocrite.
Pedophilia is commonly mistakenly used to as a blanket term to describe a sexual interest in a minor of any age, but pedophilia is actually a sexual interest in prepubescent children… a sexual interest in a teenager would be called ephebophilia.
funny – he’s just a human monkey. go figure. he has sexual desires. wow. he’s a pig. we’re all pigs. he just happens to be a little more of a pig than most. big deal.
he’s a monkey.
and
a
pig.
Pingback: Chaz’s Lifestream » Blog Archive » Daily Digest for 2009-04-10
Another absurd generalization. You have absolutely no epistemic grounding on which to place your claim.
In other words, you don’t have any knowledge that qualifies you to make a claim like that; therefore, a rational person would completely reject your claim for what it is, an ignorant, uninformed generalization.
edit: But, you’re not wrong about him being a creep.
Vaia may not have cited specific data, but it’s generally understood by psychologists that sexually repressive environments can and do exacerbate deviant predispositions. There’s enough evidence in that old, dead horse of priest abuse to support this basic point.
I dunno. Telling Larry King you don’t have a problem with gay marriage and then telling your congregation to vote for a measure that would end gay marriage in a state seems pretty hypocritical to me.
Ugh, he didn’t tell Larry he didn’t have a problem with gay marriage per se; he said he wasn’t opposing prop 8.
He has been opposed to gay marriage since day 1, and from his perspective you can be opposed to gay marriage without being “anti-gay.”
Now, we can argue about whether or not that makes him inconsistent, but being inconsistent in your thought processes and being a liar/hypocrite are two different things.
And I will continue to point out that it has not been proven that the second video was given to his entire congregation — if it has been shown, I’m willing to quit defending the guy. But, I will continue to play the role of skeptic (ironic) until some further evidence is given to show it.
What reason would you have to oppose gay marriage other than not agreeing with the lifestyle?
Not trying to be a dick, just can’t think of another reason.
You might be interested in the treatment John Shuck gives this at Shuck & Jive. He quotes from an interview in Christianity Today where Warren describes the video as a “video newsletter,” and “to his own people.” Apparently it went up on the webpage, which is how Warren interacts with most of his congregation.
Warren defends himself well in the interview, but I think Shuck has it right. Warren is the embodiment of the megachurch movement, and the face of Evangelical Christianity for thousands of people. He has to be very, very careful in how he presents his opinions.
Please send me these “big fish” you speak of. :)
That’s a good point; however, I’d argue that while it is possible it was ‘just a job’ for him, it is unlikely.
I refer you to the discussion in Clerks about subcontractors and the Death Star.
Take a look in the link in the post, it gives some history. He was an employee and a confessing Christian.
I suppose you think nobody who REALLY believes that Christian stuff does this, eh? Ted Haggard never REALLY believed. Peter never REALLY believed when he denied Jesus. Luther didn’t REALLY believe when he had those anabaptists killed. Calvin didn’t REALLY believe when he had Servetus killed. Jesus NEVER really believed when he tried to get out of his godly torture. Er, maybe not that last one.
Damn, are there any real Christians left once you really know about their personal life? Or do they just qualify as NotReal™ when you find out that icky thing that you don’t normally find out about people?
sure, I’m not convinced he ISN’T a hypocrite, just sayin…
and thanks – I haven’t seen that film yet, and will make a point of it now to further my philosophical education.
For reference. (In case you aren’t familiar.)
What are you on about, Daniel? Mrsmarshall didn’t imply any of that; only questioned whether we actually know whether he was a Christian or not, for the purposes of finding out whether it was actually hypocrisy and not merely moral turpitude.
I agree that the ones in, and abusing, power don’t really believe it. Believing is for the underling masses, to keep them in line as good tools.
(MY take on the Catholic version: bishops and above don’t believe; some good-hearted people entering the priesthood – poor fools! – really do.)
But he’s still a hypocrite. Doesn’t require a belief. Just the cover-up xian disguise, and especially playing it (work it, work it!) qualifies as hypocrisy for me.
Maybe I misread the implications. It is late, after all.
Sorry mrsmarshall if I was a bit over the top there!
I was only playing devil’s advocate…
Is there such a thing on an atheist’s blog?
I don’t see why not. The term was always meant figuratively, even in its original context. The history of it is actually quite neat.
Wow, you should see the figurative flogging scars on my back – you were on a roll there DF!!
Thanks for taking up for me Elemenope, you were right. I was only playing devil’s advocate…
Is there such a thing on an atheist’s blog?
Thanks, again!
Yeah, and judging by the usage of the term ‘teen’ in the porn world, most men are afflicted by it. From an evolutionary standpoint, that makes sense, of course. I’m still not sure how society is ever going to effectively deal with this one… not that I think it’s good, mind you– it’s just an interesting quandary in anthropological terms.
You can start with the last “Doctor” Cyrus I. Scofield, who reference bible is used by millions of Christians.
I’ve always felt that extremism in defence of some appointed “virtue” is usually cover for one’s own desire for vice. Consider wingers such as Ted Haggard and Rush Limbaugh.
And there appears to be an odd correspondence between the rank and influence of an organization and the corruption and hypocrisy within its ranks.
The Catholic Church, Ted Haggard’s outfit, … Why any day now I expect to hear that Fred Phelps cruises the Folsom Street fair in drag.
Ugh–Mind’s eye eraser needed over here, stat!
slfnflctd: “judging by the usage of the term ‘teen’ in the porn world, most men are afflicted by it”
Count me as one of them. I’m “afflicted” as you say. I’m just a monkey. Oh and a pig too. How high and mighty of you to judge me…